BusinessWeek's "Debate Room" features an interesting point-counterpoint debate on the topics of Wal-Mart's (NYSE: WMT) foray into the banking and financial services industry.

Ronald Ence of Independent Community Bankers of America naturally opposes the move: "Federal and state lawmakers traditionally have limited banks' rights to conduct commercial activities and prohibited commercial firms from owning banks. The reason: to prevent a dangerous concentration of economic and financial power or a threat to the safety and soundness of our financial system and the federal deposit insurance fund."

Howard Davidowitz disagrees: "The hue and cry over Wal-Mart's attempts to expand its financial-services business is largely motivated by a single fact: The company will offer these services at a lower cost to the consumer, taking revenue away from competitors that happen to include banks."

While I'm certainly no great fan of the world's largest retailer, I'm inclined to agree with Davidowitz. If America's banking system was succeeding in providing value to low-income consumers, Ence might have a point. But Wal-Mart will primarily be taking market share away from loan sharks and payday lenders, and that's good for America. If companies like Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) would step up and offer products that make sense for low-income workers, I might be more inclined to oppose Wal-Mart's foray into banking. But the company could step in and provide a valuable service to a market that has been largely ignored and exploited, so why not give it a shot?